Alternative statutory remedy and unexplained delay barred writ review of customs confiscation adjudication, leaving merits for appellate consideration...
Authorised courier due diligence protects against penalties where declared exports conceal prohibited goods despite proper documentation and customs p...
Customs-controlled container movement now extends to DP World facilities, subject to segregation, inspections, reconciliation, and EXIM cargo priority...
ITAT upheld the assessee's appeal, finding no justifiable basis to reclassify share application money as loans/deposits under Section 269SS. The Tribunal relied on the jurisdictional High Court's precedent, which clarified that share application money does not fall under loan or deposit provisions. Consequently, the penalty under Section 271D was not leviable. The decision affirmed the CIT(A)'s order deleting the penalty, emphasizing strict interpretation of taxing statutes and procedural requirements in penalty proceedings.
ITAT upheld the assessee's appeal, finding no justifiable basis to reclassify share application money as loans/deposits under Section 269SS. The Tribunal relied on the jurisdictional High Court's precedent, which clarified that share application money does not fall under loan or deposit provisions. Consequently, the penalty under Section 271D was not leviable. The decision affirmed the CIT(A)'s order deleting the penalty, emphasizing strict interpretation of taxing statutes and procedural requirements in penalty proceedings.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.